Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-04-11-Speech-2-265"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2000-04-11"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Deliberate release into the environment of GMOs2
dcterms:Language	"nl"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20000411.10.2-265"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2000-04-11-Speech-2-2662
lpv:speaker	lp:Rijk van Dam2
lpv:spokenAs	member; EDD (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 substitute; AFCO (1999-07-21--2000-06-12)3 vice-chair; Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Estonia Joint Parliamentary Committee (1999-09-28--2002-01-14)3 member; Delegation for relations with Israel (1999-09-28--2002-01-14)3 unknown; Staatkundig Gereformeerde Partij - Gereformeerd Politiek Verbond - Reformatorisch Politieke Federatie (1999-07-20--2002-03-17)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, in February 1999, we discussed the revision of Directive 90/220 at first reading. I would remind you that in his contribution, Mr Blokland talked about the importance of the precautionary principle. We are thus delighted that the Council has underlined this principle in the common position. Both in the main body of the Directive itself, notably in Article 1, and in its application, the precautionary principle has been accorded an important role when it comes to weighing it up against economic interests. I mainly have the restriction of the simplified procedure and the attention to GMO traceability in mind. On the whole, we should therefore be satisfied with the present proposals. We are thankful to Mr Bowe for his report, which once again contains proposals which we are totally behind. We are particularly delighted with the stricter wording related to reducing the risks for consumers. Compared to Amendment No 32, the original Amendment to Article 28 (1) was more forceful, in our opinion. It very explicitly spelled out the possibility of consulting ethical committees in the case of ethical issues. The present Amendment No 32, on the other hand, only underlines the importance of being open with the public. We regret this toning down. Finally, I would like to point out that it is not sufficient to map out and restrict the risks pertaining to these new production methods. Plants and animals are not production factors which can simply be manipulated. The biotechnology debate requires an integral ethical approach. We believe that God created the world. Based on this awareness, we need to treat the natural world around us responsibly."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph